Jul 7, 2011 12:00pm EDT
takeover of the health care system. all we have to do is take a look at canada and britain. i mean, we don't have to theorize what that will result in. it will result in rationing. the medical innovation that saved my daughter's life and millions of others, it really is america where medical mir release are are created. that innovation will come it a grinding halt. that's just the quality aspect of health care bill. it is going to destroy our budget. i wrote a piece with the ex-c.b.o. director, when this thing kicks in, as it is designed to do and a large percentage of americans lose their employer health care coverage we're taking about maybe $900 billion. we're bankrupting america, senator. that's why i ran. mr. sessions: i would ask unanimous consent that i be given one additional minute? the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. mr. sessions: mr. president, i just want to say, we have in this colloquy senator blunt, who is the second-rank republican leader in the house and who has dealt with these issues for many, many years, we are so glad to have h
Jul 20, 2011 9:00am EDT
make some progress. second, none of these questions is restricted to britain. right across the world you got a problem that police forces are accountable to government and yet independent from them. and we must never compromise operational independence and this goes to some of the questions i was asked earlier. we musn't move to a system where you have politicians stepping in to say, why haven't you rerun this investigation. why haven't you arrested that person? we ought to think for a moment where that would lead. but i think it does make it all the more important that police leadership is strong and they are called to account when they fail. and that's why we're introducing directly elected police and crime commissioners to bring that kind of accountability to policing. i give way to the secretary chairman. >> i'm grateful to my right honorable friend and i'm grateful to the point he just made does he know not agree that he needs to be clear beyond a doubt, that it should not begin or indeed should begin. >> you're absolutely right. we must maintain operational independence.
Jul 12, 2011 9:00am EDT
. it's about the murdoch heritage. it's about the newspapers in britain rather than about the future of news corp. >> it could go spent i'm not suggesting it happens today. i'm not suggesting five years time, but actually maybe if there's a post rupert murdoch moment, and who knows what that will be, when the guys in new york want to make a distant company. >> remember, that the only grounds of the competition commissioner going to judge the sky deal on its plurality. that is, its impact on the number of distinct voices in british news. if the murdoch empire gets rid of its british newspapers, well, the plurality problem goes away. >> now, michael is a contributing editor to "vanity fair," and knows rupert murdoch better than most having spent 50 hours interviewing him for a biography. he joins us now from new york. this talk that we are over on this side of the atlantic, that murdoch might just get rid of all his newspapers here in order to concentrate on television, doesn't make sense to use the? well, we hear it on the side of the atlantic, too. but i think what we're hearing is the